Malcolm Macarthur's notoriety means he has been treated differently to other life prisoners, writes Carol Coulter, Legal Affairs Correspondent.
This week, Malcolm Macarthur has taken up residence in the open prison of Shelton Abbey in Co Wicklow. There, he will have his own room and is likely to work in the garden.
Some residents of Shelton Abbey work in the community before their eventual release. In due course, Macarthur is likely to do likewise. In any event, he will probably be released, on licence, in the relatively near future.
There have been some outraged reactions to this news, as if he is being treated differently to other life prisoners. He may indeed be treated differently - but if so, he is being treated more, rather than less, harshly than average.
Detailed facts about prisoners who have received life sentences are hard to come by, and the Prison Service does not reveal information about individual prisoners. But in 2001, the then Minister for Justice, John O'Donoghue, told the Dáil that between January 1995 and December 2000, 41 people serving life sentences were released. The average number of years served in prison by these prisoners was 14. Macarthur has already served 20 years, and will have served more by the time he is eventually released.
Prisoners serving life sentences are released subject to various conditions, including supervision for the rest of their lives by the Probation and Welfare Service. Failure to abide by these conditions may result in their return to prison without any further court proceedings. In order to access this release scheme, a prisoner must appear before the Parole Board, which reviews their cases.
All long-serving prisoners, with the exception of those serving sentence for specific offences, such as murder of members of the Garda, are eligible to have their sentences reviewed after seven years. But this does not lead to immediate release in the case of those convicted of murder, as the figures show.
The decision is made by the Minister for Justice, who accepts the recommendation of the Parole Board in 92 per cent of cases.The board consists of people from the medical/psychiatric profession, the Probation and Welfare Service, the Department of Justice, the Prison Service and four community representatives.
The questions it considers are: would the release constitute a threat to the community; would it be reasonable to grant some form of release at that particular stage, in view of the nature of the offence; would the prisoner merit it, having regard to his or her behaviour while in prison and if there are any compassionate grounds which merit special consideration.
After the initial review, the prisoner is entitled to further reviews at three-yearly intervals.
The board can make any or all of three core recommendations: a programme of short-term release leading to full temporary release; a transfer to another prison or an open prison; or a structured therapy, education or work training programme, or escorted outings.
In relation to Macarthur, the recommendation that he be moved to an open prison came last year. There would have been four or five reviews of his case by then. He clearly was not considered to still pose a threat to society. However, he murdered nurse Bridie Gargan in 1982 in what appears to have been a random and brutal attack.
At a time when murder was much less commonplace than it is now (there were 62 unlawful killings in 2002), the crime caused widespread outrage. This was combined with the notoriety attracted by his apparent connections to the highest political and social circles in the State. He was arrested in the house of the then Attorney General, Patrick Connolly, and was known as a socialite. There was understandable pressure on the authorities to ensure that he was effectively prosecuted and, when convicted, served a long sentence.
The Parole Board would not have wanted to have been seen to err on the side of leniency in this particular case.